Senator Thom Tillis (R) asks Attorney General Loretta Lynch if the Justice Department is looking into whether Bill and/or Hillary Clinton took funds from foreign governments while Hillary served as secretary of state. Presumably this refers to the Clinton Foundation, which accepted millions of dollars from foreign governments during that time. Lynch replies, “I’m not aware of any other issue along the lines of what you have outlined.” (Politico, 3/9/2016)

A letter addressed to State Department Inspector General Steve Linick and Intelligence Community Inspector General Charles McCullough is signed by the “ranking Democrats on the House and Senate committees overseeing intelligence, foreign affairs, government operations, Homeland Security and the judiciary.” The letter states, “Already, this review has been too politicized. […] We are relying on you as independent inspectors general to perform your duties dispassionately and comprehensively.”

A spokesperson for Linick rejects the accusations. Linick has released two interim reports about Clinton’s emails and server, and is expected to release a final report in another month or two. (The New York Times, 3/10/2016)

The Republican National Committee (RNC) files two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits seeking more emails from Clinton and her top aides.

The first lawsuit seeks all emails the State Department has that are to and from Clinton, as well as Clinton’s top aides Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan, Patrick Kennedy, and Bryan Pagliano. (Huma Abedin isn’t included because she’s covered in another FOIA lawsuit.) The lawsuit is also seeking all of Clinton’s text messages as well as BlackBerry Messenger communications.

The second lawsuit seeks emails between senior State Department officials and Clinton’s 2016 Democratic presidential campaign and its allied entities. The RNC asked the State Department for the emails in October 2015 but hadn’t gotten any yet. RNC chair Reince Priebus says, “The Obama administration has failed to comply with records requests in a timely manner as required by law.” (The Hill, 3/9/2016)

Although Clinton says she has already turned over all her work-related emails, some more will be found by the State Department due to another limited FOIA lawsuit later in March, suggesting more could be uncovered by the department. (The Hill, 3/24/2016) (ABC News, 3/9/2016)

Trump, the frontrunner in the race for the Republican presidential nomination, is asked if he would pursue a criminal indictment of Clinton if Attorney General Loretta Lynch does not. Trump replies, “You have to.”

Politico comments, “Trump’s answer conflicts with 40 years of precedent. His suggestion that he would seek an indictment flies in the face of the longstanding practice of limiting White House involvement in the prosecutorial decisions made by an attorney general. (Politico, 3/9/2016)

Moderator Jorge Ramos asks her if she would quit the presidential race if she is indicted.

Clinton replies, “Oh, for goodness… it’s not going to happen. I’m not even answering that question,” She also says, “I think that what we’ve got here is a case of over-classification. […] I’m not concerned about; I’m not worried about it, and no Democrat or American should be, either.” (The Hill, 3/9/2016)

During a presidential election debate, Clinton says, “It wasn’t the best choice. I made a mistake. It was not prohibited. It was not in any way disallowed.” She adds, “What you are talking about is retroactive classification, And I think what we have got here is a case of over-classification.”

However, the Washington Post will later note, “Her statement appears to conflict with a report to Congress last year by inspectors general from the State Department and the group of spy agencies known as the Intelligence Community.”

Referring to some classified emails that had been discovered, the report stated, “These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department. Rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to [intelligence community] classification officials, that information remains classified today. This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.” (The Washington Post, 3/27/2016)